Sacramento County Grand Jury
• 2008-2009
Dedication The members of the 2008-2009 Grand Jury dedicate this Final Report to
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 32 findings
F1
Page 18
There is a longstanding absence on the part of HHS and CPS management to accept responsibility and accountability for the role of CPS in meeting its community responsibilities. This is a recurring criticism found for over a decade of many published reports.
F2
Page 18
A shield of privacy and secrecy that surrounds much of the operations of CPS is unwarranted. This lack of transparency serves to raise questions and leads to inaccurate conclusions being made regarding what takes place in CPS. The acknowledged need to protect the confidentiality of case information can be accomplished without adopting a “closed door” attitude.
F3
Page 19
1: CPS personnel have rarely had performance evaluations.
F4
Page 19
The County’s Human Resources Department (HR) disseminated annual evaluation reminders to CPS management. However no follow-up action was done to see if such evaluations actually took place.
F5
Page 19
HR has neglected to train supervisory personnel in the proper method of personnel evaluation.
F6
Page 19
Substantial finger pointing exists between CPS and HR personnel regarding quality of service. 20
F7
Page 20
Disciplinary proceedings are compromised by the absence of evaluations of all employees.
F8
Page 20
There is an average time of one year from the start of paid administrative leave to resolution. This contributes to the caseload of other employees, and decreases staff morale.
F9
Page 21
According to sworn testimony, the recent HR reorganization increased the ratio of CPS disciplinary cases per HR analyst.
F10
Page 21
Poor communication between HR and CPS contributes to lengthy disposition of discipline cases.
F11
Page 21
A 22 percent annual turnover rate in CPS social workers is a major impediment to program efficiency and effectiveness.
F12
Page 21
Skilled social workers who do not want to be supervisors have no way to be promoted.
F13
Page 21
1: Except for the first year of employment, employees are not compliant with the 30-hour training requirement. In a sample review of 60 employee records, 50 were not in compliance.
F14
Page 22
Training entries for new employees do not show the correct total number of training hours those employees actually took.
F15
Page 22
1: A caseload is not defined.
F16
Page 22
Social workers do work that could be done by support staff.
F17
Page 22
Management has not required personnel to take full advantage of their available software. CPS management acknowledges its failures to fully use these systems. 23
F18
Page 23
The Grand Jury found that supervisory personnel and upper management were not adequately using IRIS. The current design of the software changes each case entry information to a red font when the case exceeds certain limits. This is helpful but does not provide enough information about the urgency of the case.
F19
Page 23
The CWS/CMS software package is provided and controlled by the State and cannot be modified by CPS IT personnel. These personnel can recommend appropriate change through statewide user-councils to improve the software.
F20
Page 23
There is a lack of management control of SDM usage. It was reported to the Grand Jury that at most 60 percent of the social workers adequately use SDM. The Self Assessment Report states: “. . . its use remains inconsistent and inaccurate.” 24
F21
Page 24
The SafeMeasures program has not been used adequately by many of the supervisors and managers. Usage is reportedly less than 20 percent.
F22
Page 24
Quality Assurance (QA) personnel are not knowledgeable in the use of all the software and were not using the SafeMeasures software to assess the quality of services provided.
F23
Page 24
The CPS in-take phone lines currently do not have recording capability. CPS personnel have investigated this issue and found that other counties have this capability and it did not interfere with reporting.
F24
Page 24
Testimony from CPS management indicates that social workers do not have electronic devices to record information while they are in the field.
F25
Page 24
Currently social workers, with password generation devices called “Tokens” (a secure means of handling sensitive data) can access the CWS/CMS computer system from home. CPS has issued about 80 of these “Tokens.” 25
F26
Page 25
Flaws in the SDM may result in children being exposed to dangerous and abusive conditions. The Risk Assessment process requires that CPS respond within 24 hours if a child is under age two. If the child is over two, the response time may be extended to ten days.
F27
Page 25
SDM is not been utilized as envisioned. Testimony indicated that this valuable risk assessment tool was frequently completed after the fact and viewed simply as an administrative “requirement” by social workers.
F28
Page 25
SDM allows a response of ten days even when there is a history of “physical abuse, domestic violence, caregiver mental health, or substance abuse concerns” if there is a “responsible” adult on the premises. Experts in domestic violence state that if there is domestic violence in the home there is a 50 percent chance that the children will also be abused. When these circumstances exist, no adult on the premises should be considered “responsible. “
F29
Page 25
The California Family Risk Assessment Tool can fail to adequately determine the level of risk to which a child may be exposed.
F30
Page 26
2: The CPS manual does not have a usable table of contents, index, or electronic search engine capability.
F31
Page 26
The law governing reporting does not require that the Mandated Reporter hold or detain a child suspected of being abused. It only requires that he or she report the suspected abuse to the proper authorities.
F32
Page 26
The Grand Jury does not have full access to unredacted reports for legitimate investigative purposes.
Recommendations 32
-
R1Page 181: The Board of Supervisors conduct a thorough assessment of the performance of HHS and CPS management. These administrators must demonstrate more than subject matter expertise. They must demonstrate an ability to ignite the enthusiasm of CPS supervisory and rank and file professionals and exhibit the creative energy and management skill necessary to lead CPS in the challenges ahead.
-
R2Page 18Greater transparency of CPS operations must be exhibited on the part of CPS management. They should do more to aggressively open the doors of CPS activities to the eyes of the public, the County Board of 19 Supervisors, non-profit organizations, K–12 schools and universities, the Legislature, the medical community, and the media. Transparency does not prevent possible negative publicity, but does mean that questions can be asked and answered in an atmosphere of openness and honesty. Evaluations
-
R3Page 19The completion of yearly evaluations on all employees must be recognized as a critical, high priority activity required of supervisors and managers.
-
R4Page 19HR must accept its responsibility for ensuring the completion of annual performance appraisals as part of their fundamental personnel oversight responsibilities.
-
R5Page 19CPS supervisory personnel must attend a training course specifically focused on employee performance evaluations
-
R6Page 20Greater interdepartmental cooperation must exist between CPS and the HR Department. CPS management must do more to demand and improve the delivery of services from the HR Department. Management attention and involvement must be brought to the table to reconcile this festering issue. Discipline Procedures
-
R7Page 201: CPS management should work with the Human Resources Department to immediately complete employee evaluations on all CPS personnel.
-
R8Page 201: Given the number of cases referred for discipline and the lengthy time until resolution, the Grand Jury recommends that more of the current HR staff be reallocated to CPS.
-
R9Page 21An alternative organizational structure, which would provide more efficient HR disciplinary support to CPS, should be considered.
-
R10Page 21HR should develop effective training seminars for all supervisors and managers of CPS to promote greater understanding of the requirements needed for a rapid adjudication of cases. Recruitment and Retention
-
R11Page 21CPS management should prepare an analysis of this turnover problem and implement a recommendation plan.
-
R12Page 21Establish a “specialist” classification in CPS available to social workers who are able to take on unique and complex cases. Training
-
R13Page 211: Program managers and supervisors must ensure that their employees attend classes and satisfy the 30-hour annual requirement. 22
-
R14Page 22CPS should review the training log for accuracy and corrects erroneous entries. Caseload
-
R15Page 221 CPS should define a case and establish caseload and workload criteria.
-
R16Page 22Tasks not needing the skills of a social worker should be turned over to support staff. Information Technology
-
R17Page 231: All CPS personnel should be required to pass software proficiency examinations.
-
R18Page 231: Division Managers should provide additional IRIS training and demand greater use of the software by program managers and supervisors. Program Information Notice 08-12, which provides detailed instructions of the use of IRIS, should be strictly followed.
-
R19Page 231: Changes should be made that will not allow deleting, but will require strikeouts and additional comments.
-
R20Page 24Social workers should be required to use SDM 100 percent of the time.
-
R21Page 241: All supervisors and management should receive additional training in the use of SafeMeasures.
-
R22Page 24QA personnel should receive training in the use of all CPS software and be required to use SafeMeasures in their assessment of CPS programs.
-
R23Page 24High priority should be given to purchasing and installing the voice recorder system as soon as possible.
-
R24Page 24CPS should investigate electronic devices that could improve social worker efficiency. Factors such as worker safety and client confidentiality should be considered.
-
R25Page 25This system should continue but annual reassessments should be conducted to evaluate its value, safety and security. Structured Decision Making and Risk Assessment Tools
-
R26Page 25The County should expand this age group to five and under. With this change in place any child who is not of school age would require 24-hour response.
-
R27Page 25Social workers should use the SDM tool as designed to adequately assess risk.
-
R28Page 25Whenever there is prior history of physical abuse or domestic violence, the response should be 24 hours or less.
-
R29Page 25CPS should reexamine this tool and find ways to improve its usage. Policies and Procedures Manual
-
R30Page 26The CPS policy manual should be completely rewritten to include an index and expanded table of contents and be in digital form with electronic search capability. Legislative Needs
-
R31Page 261: The County Board of Supervisors should request the State Legislature amend the appropriate sections of the Penal Code to authorize such detention.
-
R32Page 261: The County Board of Supervisors should request the State Legislature amend Welfare and Institutions Code 827 to include the Grand Jury in the list of “Persons Authorized to View Juvenile Records without a Petition or Court Order.” 27
Conclusions 4
-
CL1 Page 60Have buildings been erected at Haggin Oaks Golf Course without building permits?
-
CL2 Page 60Is water drainage from washing golf carts contaminating a creek?
-
CL3 Page 60Did the contractor who was awarded the project file bankruptcy before the cart washing equipment was operational?
-
CL4 Page 60Are oak trees endangering the golfers? Reason for the Investigation The Grand Jury initiated this investigation as a result of a citizen's complaint. Method of Investigation Building Permits: The Grand Jury contacted the City of Sacramento Development Services Department to obtain a print-out of all building permits that have been issued for construction at any time at the Haggin Oaks Golf Course. Copies of permits for the cart washing machine were also reviewed. Water Drainage: The Grand Jury made an on-site inspection to determine the extent of drainage into the creek. The EPA website was examined and personal interviews conducted. Contractors Business Status: The Grand Jury, conducting web searches of Sacramento Business (a website on Sacramento businesses by the California Secretary of State), Sacramento Better Business Bureau, and Contractors State License Board to determine the business status of the contractor. Oak Trees: The Grand Jury conducted a site visit with the Operations Manager to 61 review conditions of the trees.
Observations 133
-
OB1 Page 72Conflict of Interest, Sacramento International 1998
-
OB2 Page 72Encroaching Land Use 2002
-
OB3 Page 72Executive Airport 1994
-
OB4 Page 72Sacramento County Airport System 2008 Cities: Citrus Heights
-
OB5 Page 72Credit Card Usage 2001
-
OB6 Page 72Oversight of Contract Services 2006 Elk Grove
-
OB7 Page 72Elk Grove City Council 2006
-
OB8 Page 72Elk Grove City Council (Response) 2007
-
OB9 Page 72Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibility 2002
-
OB10 Page 72Elk Grove USD (Response) 2003
-
OB11 Page 72Elk Grove Animal Services 2008
-
OB12 Page 72Cemetery District Management 1993
-
OB13 Page 72Head Stone Damage 2006 Folsom
-
OB14 Page 72Credit Card Usage-City of Folsom 2001
-
OB15 Page 72Folsom Sewage Spills Continue 2002
-
OB16 Page 72Landscape and Lighting District Assessment 2005 1 Galt
-
OB17 Page 73Failure to Oversee Delivery of Services Contracted 2005
-
OB18 Page 73Galt-Arno Cemetery District Operations 1997, 2001
-
OB19 Page 73Lighting and Landscape Districts 2001
-
OB20 Page 73Misuse of Appointive Power by City Council 2003
-
OB21 Page 73Review of Galt-Arno District Operations 1998 Isleton
-
OB22 Page 73Administrative and Fiscal Problems 1995
-
OB23 Page 73Complaints Against the Police 1998,1999,2001,2006
-
OB24 Page 73Policies and Procedures 1995,1999
-
OB25 Page 73Governance, “Small City – Big Challenges” 2008 Sacramento City
-
OB26 Page 73Convention Center Operation 1997
-
OB27 Page 73Financial Incentives for Targeted Business 1997
-
OB28 Page 73Mayor's Office: Use of Time and Resources 1998
-
OB29 Page 73North Natomas: Development Gone Awry 2007
-
OB30 Page 73Regional Radio Communications Review 1999
-
OB31 Page 73Sewer Discharge into the American River 2001
-
OB32 Page 73Sacramento City Unified School District Retirement 2006 County of Sacramento
-
OB33 Page 73Certificates of Participation 1994
-
OB34 Page 73Complaint against Taxi Owners 2005,2006
-
OB35 Page 73Communications and Information Technology 1999
-
OB36 Page 73County Civil Service Commission 2005
-
OB37 Page 73County Civil Service Commission (Response) 2006
-
OB38 Page 73County Employee Evaluations 1993
-
OB39 Page 73County Heat Emergency Response 2007
-
OB40 Page 73County Primary Care Clinic 2007
-
OB41 Page 73Directed Brokerage Program of the County Retirement System 2002
-
OB42 Page 73Economic Incentive Policy 1997 2
-
OB43 Page 74Failure of County to Oversee Contract Services/Galt 2005
-
OB44 Page 74Firefighters, Our Local Heroes 1996
-
OB45 Page 74Financing of Local Government 1994
-
OB46 Page 74Flood Risk in Sacramento County 2007
-
OB47 Page 74Homeland Security, Ready or Not 2005
-
OB48 Page 74Homeland Security, Ready or Not (Response) 2006
-
OB49 Page 74Letter Grades for Restaurants 2003
-
OB50 Page 74Sacramento-Yolo Port District 1995 Coroner's Office
-
OB51 Page 74Crime Laboratory 1993,2000
-
OB52 Page 74Death Investigations 2003
-
OB53 Page 74Fees for Transporting Bodies 2000
-
OB54 Page 74Review of Vendor Contracts/RFP 1999 District Attorney's Office
-
OB55 Page 74Bureau of Family Support 2002
-
OB56 Page 74Child Abuse and Neglect 1998
-
OB57 Page 74Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1998
-
OB58 Page 74Child Support and Collection Enforcement 1997
-
OB59 Page 74Communication and Internal Management 1993
-
OB60 Page 74Multidisciplinary Interview Center 1993
-
OB61 Page 74Political Activities in School Districts 1997
-
OB62 Page 74American River Flood Control District 1997 Department of Health and Human Services
-
OB63 Page 74Adult Protective Services 1996,1997,2002
-
OB64 Page 74Aging Out Foster Children-Foster Parents 2001
-
OB65 Page 74Child Abuse in Sacramento County 1996 3
-
OB66 Page 75Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1994
-
OB67 Page 75Child Protective Services at the Crossroads 2000
-
OB68 Page 75Child Protective Services Intake Services 2006
-
OB69 Page 75Changes Needed in Juvenile Mental Health Services 2002
-
OB70 Page 75Children's Receiving Home 1999
-
OB71 Page 75Development of New Programs for Foster Children 2005
-
OB72 Page 75Family Maintenance and Reunification 1995
-
OB73 Page 75Juvenile Hall Mental Health Services 1993
-
OB74 Page 75Mental Health Services in Juvenile Justice System 2001
-
OB75 Page 75Mental Health Treatment Center 1999
-
OB76 Page 75Public Guardian and Conservatorship 1995 Environmental Services Department
-
OB77 Page 75Mismanagement of the Environmental Department 2000
-
OB78 Page 75Review of Conflict of Interest Statement 1997 Medical Services
-
OB79 Page 75County Emergency Ambulance Provider 1993
-
OB80 Page 75Flood Disaster Evacuation of Medically Infirm 2006
-
OB81 Page 75Goals and Objectives of Mental Health Services 2006
-
OB82 Page 75Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001 Probation Department
-
OB83 Page 75Boy's Ranch and Carson Creek High School 1995
-
OB84 Page 75Domestic Violence Programs 2002
-
OB85 Page 75Juvenile Justice Facilities and Staffing 2000
-
OB86 Page 75Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001
-
OB87 Page 75Unequal Treatment of Female Inmates 2002 Public Library 4
-
OB88 Page 76Sacramento Public Library Authority 2008
-
OB89 Page 76County Library Authority 2000
-
OB90 Page 76Use of Alternate Sentencing Volunteers 1993 Sheriff's Department
-
OB91 Page 76Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center 2007
-
OB92 Page 76Escape at Cosumnes 1998
-
OB93 Page 76Women's Detention Facility 1994 Main Jail
-
OB94 Page 76Handling and Security of Inmate Correspondence 2005
-
OB95 Page 76Jail health Inmate Psychiatric Services 2004
-
OB96 Page 76Jail Training for Officers 1995
-
OB97 Page 76Main Jail Health Care 2006
-
OB98 Page 76Use of Prostraint Chair 1998
-
OB99 Page 76Women's Holding Cells 1997
-
OB100 Page 76Sheriff's Tactical Air Response Operation 1993
-
OB101 Page 76Work Release Program 2007 Special Districts
-
OB102 Page 76Retained Earnings-Sacramento County Special Districts 2001
-
OB103 Page 76Financing of Local Governments 1994
-
OB104 Page 76Remuneration to Special District Board Members 1994
-
OB105 Page 74American River Flood Control District 1997
-
OB106 Page 76Cable TV Commission and the Brown Act 1994
-
OB107 Page 76American River Fire District Management Review 1993
-
OB108 Page 76Wilton Firefighters on Fire Board of Directors 2002 5
-
OB109 Page 77Mosquito and Vector Control District Operations 1999
-
OB110 Page 77Regional Sanitation District Economic Incentives 1997
-
OB111 Page 77Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency 1994
-
OB112 Page 77SMUD, Economic Development Plan 1997
-
OB113 Page 77SMUD, Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant 2007
-
OB114 Page 77Carmichael District Operational Issues 1997
-
OB115 Page 77Recommendations for Water District Accountability 2003 School Districts
-
OB116 Page 77Center USD Violations of Brown Act 1998
-
OB117 Page 77Community School Usage 1994
-
OB118 Page 77Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibilities 2002
-
OB119 Page 77Elk Grove Benefits Employee Retirement Trust 2008
-
OB120 Page 77• Folsom/Cordova USD Inventory Practices 1993 Grant/ Union USD
-
OB121 Page 77Inappropriate Use of Public Funds 2004
-
OB122 Page 77Policies, Procedures and Administration 1994 Sacramento City USD
-
OB123 Page 77Management, Fiscal Problems 1995
-
OB124 Page 77School District Maintenance 1995
-
OB125 Page 77Allegation of Dual Employment, Two Public Agencies 1998
-
OB126 Page 77Board of Education Oversight of CASA 2004
-
OB127 Page 77Lack of Response to Requests for Information 1997
-
OB128 Page 77School Safety in Jeopardy 2003
-
OB129 Page 77Students Walking to School 2005
-
OB130 Page 77Volunteers Working on School Grounds 1993 Non-Profit Organizations 6
-
OB131 Page 78Children's Receiving Home 1993
-
OB132 Page 78Sacramento Handicapped Parking Patrol Inc. 1995 State Prison System
-
OB133 Page 78Transport of Prisoners for Non-Emergency Medical Care 2002 7
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Sacramento
City
Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District
Fire District